Went to my local SonyStyle store over the weekend, and saw the 3D TV for the first time. They had 3 pairs of glasses(chained up), and I had to wait in line to view it. Once you put on the glasses, it was beautiful! They were showing a loop of zoo animals, the polar bear in swimming in the water makes it looks like I am standing behind a glass wall and there's a polar bear right inside the tank! Plenty of depth in the video!!! It's the same effect as on the AVATAR, but in a much smaller scale. The screen is a 42", and I was standing about 10' away due to where the glasses was chained to. It was as good as watching AVATAR, as the screen size is just too small. I think if they can make a 60'-65" TV, I'd be interested in upgrading my 55" this year.

I think display size is going to be the largest limiting factor for 3D HDTV in the home.

Someone on the Plasma forum said that Panasonic has a 103" going around, I think this is too big and too expensive for most people. but if they can make a 70", which Sony does have a 70"LCD, then that will be a good size for most living room i think.

Someone on the Plasma forum said that Panasonic has a 103" going around, I think this is too big and too expensive for most people. but if they can make a 70", which Sony does have a 70"LCD, then that will be a good size for most living room i think.

60" reasonable price June/July.

If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life.Henry David Thoreau

I went to the local Sony Style store today based on reading this thread. I want to like 3d...I want to justify buying a new tv this year....but it just doesn't do much for me. They had Cloudy with a chance of meatballs playing and wearing the 3d glassess is awkward and the 3d effect seems hokey. Granted I wear glassess and that might have a lot to do with my experience with 3d in general. I might end up buying a 3d set this year just to be future ready but not sure I would use the 3d aspect of it much except for a few movies a year or to show to friends. I would likely use it 99% for 2d HD viewing.

#3. It requires 3D Content where is the 3D content??? Broadcasts? Nope, Only Gaming Maybe.

#4. It WILL DOMINATE because of 3D PORN (Yes 100% true) BUT. These 3D Cameras are Expensive Porn producers work Cheap.
Porn is 100% FREE, How Much will you pay for 1 3D Porn DVD???
(yes I will buy one someday) But FREE is better.

#5. It looked Amazing the Depth is there, clarity also, But How about trying to Get LCD Technology as Good as CRT Tube technology was at Colors and Motion, before We go adding another Feature, that there is ZERO support for right now.

Its like Look at my Awesome NEw Rims and 20 inch tires, on my Beat up rusty 1980 Dodge Dynasty.

I'd rather look at a direct Rich Vibrant colorfull display with my own eyes which I paid alot of money for Lasik Surgery to get corrected, and now have better than 20/20 so Details matter to me.

I suspect most people on this forum are too young to know this, but it was porn that made the VHS business in the first place. And if I remember correctly, Sony wouldn't license Beta to porn publishers, so they all went VHS.

While I am not a consumer of porn myself, I do think that 3D porn is going to be a really, really big business. And if it's only deliverable on physical media (such as Blu-ray), it will save the porn industry, which is suffering from all the free online porn.

And as if that is not enough, I saw an article recently about a company that has invented a "robotic girlfriend" (which is as 3D as you can get). This link is not the original article that I read, but you'll get the idea:

I suspect most people on this forum are too young to know this, but it was porn that made the VHS business in the first place. And if I remember correctly, Sony wouldn't license Beta to porn publishers, so they all went VHS.

While I am not a consumer of porn myself, I do think that 3D porn is going to be a really, really big business. And if it's only deliverable on physical media (such as Blu-ray), it will save the porn industry, which is suffering from all the free online porn.

And as if that is not enough, I saw an article recently about a company that has invented a "robotic girlfriend" (which is as 3D as you can get). This link is not the original article that I read, but you'll get the idea:

#3. It requires 3D Content where is the 3D content??? Broadcasts? Nope, Only Gaming Maybe.

#4. It WILL DOMINATE because of 3D PORN (Yes 100% true) BUT. These 3D Cameras are Expensive Porn producers work Cheap.
Porn is 100% FREE, How Much will you pay for 1 3D Porn DVD???
(yes I will buy one someday) But FREE is better.

#5. It looked Amazing the Depth is there, clarity also, But How about trying to Get LCD Technology as Good as CRT Tube technology was at Colors and Motion, before We go adding another Feature, that there is ZERO support for right now.

Its like Look at my Awesome NEw Rims and 20 inch tires, on my Beat up rusty 1980 Dodge Dynasty.

I'd rather look at a direct Rich Vibrant colorfull display with my own eyes which I paid alot of money for Lasik Surgery to get corrected, and now have better than 20/20 so Details matter to me.

They call me dead pixel spotter.

I saw the demo featuring Cloudy WACOM also. It was no where near dull though. That particular movie has an unusual color scheme and it's much different than other animated features. Still, I found it to be quite rich in colors with the glasses on. As for the sets being affordable from what news that has been released thus far, 3D sets are not far from last years prices and many (me included) can't wait for them to be released.

I suspect most people on this forum are too young to know this, but it was porn that made the VHS business in the first place. And if I remember correctly, Sony wouldn't license Beta to porn publishers, so they all went VHS.

While I am not a consumer of porn myself, I do think that 3D porn is going to be a really, really big business. And if it's only deliverable on physical media (such as Blu-ray), it will save the porn industry, which is suffering from all the free online porn.

And as if that is not enough, I saw an article recently about a company that has invented a "robotic girlfriend" (which is as 3D as you can get). This link is not the original article that I read, but you'll get the idea:

Someone on the Plasma forum said that Panasonic has a 103" going around, I think this is too big and too expensive for most people. but if they can make a 70", which Sony does have a 70"LCD, then that will be a good size for most living room i think.

They do have a 103" plasma going around, but that's only for their demo truck. They will be releasing a 50", 55" and 65" I believe. I was rather impressed with the technology when the Panasonic truck came to town, but I don't need to be an early adopter on this one as I dropped 3500 bones on a Samsung LED lit LCD last year. I also think the technology will advance quickly to try to get rid of the glasses. DirecTV is supposed to be working in conjunction with Panasonic and three 3D stations are to be online this year. They've also said pricing will be on par with last years high end LED/LCD's, so I'd expect tv's to be in the $3000-$5000 range.

#3. It requires 3D Content where is the 3D content??? Broadcasts? Nope, Only Gaming Maybe.

#4. It WILL DOMINATE because of 3D PORN (Yes 100% true) BUT. These 3D Cameras are Expensive Porn producers work Cheap.
Porn is 100% FREE, How Much will you pay for 1 3D Porn DVD???
(yes I will buy one someday) But FREE is better.

#5. It looked Amazing the Depth is there, clarity also, But How about trying to Get LCD Technology as Good as CRT Tube technology was at Colors and Motion, before We go adding another Feature, that there is ZERO support for right now.

Its like Look at my Awesome NEw Rims and 20 inch tires, on my Beat up rusty 1980 Dodge Dynasty.

I'd rather look at a direct Rich Vibrant colorfull display with my own eyes which I paid alot of money for Lasik Surgery to get corrected, and now have better than 20/20 so Details matter to me.

They call me dead pixel spotter.

3d content will be supplied from Playstation 3, broadcasts (espn, discovery, etc.), and Blu-Ray 3d. The tvs will also do a 2d-3d conversion, but no word on how well that works yet.

The tvs will also do a 2d-3d conversion, but no word on how well that works yet.

I'm very interested in the conversion. I've read a couple of unenthusiastic comments from people who saw some sort of pre-cooked demo at CES. Also, I noticed that the Amazon product page for the Samsung 3D sets mentions conversion, but doesn't list it as a feature -- that suggests it's pretty pathetic at this point. But I like to hear from anyone who's seen it.

I saw some converted 3D at the CEDIA show last year and I didn't like it. It makes the picture look like a series of cardboard cut-outs. I think it could end up putting a lot of people off 3D because they'll see it in a store and think that's what all 3D TV looks like.

I've read a couple of unenthusiastic comments from people who saw some sort of pre-cooked demo at CES...... But I like to hear from anyone who's seen it.

I saw several 2D to 3D demos at CES and not one of them was "ready for prime time." At best they looked like 2D cutouts and at worst there were severe retinal rivalry problems (left eye and right eye images so different that the brain refuses to converge them.) Nobody at the show could explain how the software determined its depth cues. In fact, several demos had foreground objects behind background objects. Most uncomfortable.

BTW, I saw the Cloudy WACOM 3D demo at the Sony Style store in Costa Mesa, CA. The color saturation and depth looked great, but there was a very noticeable flicker. It looked like a 60Hz image where each eye was refreshed at 30Hz. Has anyone else noticed this? None of the CES demos exhibited this problem.

I saw several 2D to 3D demos at CES and not one of them was "ready for prime time." At best they looked like 2D cutouts and at worst there were severe retinal rivalry problems (left eye and right eye images so different that the brain refuses to converge them.) Nobody at the show could explain how the software determined its depth cues. In fact, several demos had foreground objects behind background objects. Most uncomfortable.

BTW, I saw the Cloudy WACOM 3D demo at the Sony Style store in Costa Mesa, CA. The color saturation and depth looked great, but there was a very noticeable flicker. It looked like a 60Hz image where each eye was refreshed at 30Hz. Has anyone else noticed this? None of the CES demos exhibited this problem.

I've never seen a decent "on the fly" 2D to 3D conversion, and don't think I ever will. How will a processsing micro computer ever determine what should be where stereoscopicly without any points of reference? It's like trying to make a box that will automatically convert B&W movies to color. With "on the fly" conversion processes, some will push the image back some, twist the image, and/or or use motion to make pulfrich based stereo motion effects. But this is a random effect on already shot 2D features .. and without human intervention in the post processing stage.. will sometimes appear to be reversed.

If you were seeing some flicker with a 120hz display, it certainly sounds like either the display was set up wrong, or (my guess is) the batteries in the wireless glasses were starting to give out. I've used frame sequential set-ups for the last ten years, and at least for me, anything above 85hz was basicly flicker free. 120hz is very, very clean. The only side effect I've ever noticed are the occasional phasing artifacts from certain pans or movement, but that is unavoidable in any sequential based 3-D system.

BTW, I saw the Cloudy WACOM 3D demo at the Sony Style store in Costa Mesa, CA. The color saturation and depth looked great, but there was a very noticeable flicker. It looked like a 60Hz image where each eye was refreshed at 30Hz. Has anyone else noticed this? None of the CES demos exhibited this problem.

I wandered passed the Sony Style store in Dallas today and saw the 3D sign in their front window so I went in. The flicker on the display was horrendously bad. If 3D is going to be like this, you couldn't pay me enough to have it in my house.

After none of the early posts in this thread mentioned it, I thought the problem was just with me. I know in the old days of CRT computer monitors, 60 Hz refresh rates would drive me crazy yet few of the people I worked with could even see the problem. For me, the problem would go away with a refresh rate above 72 Hz. There were no signs on the display saying what the refresh rate was. Hopefully, it was 120 Hz feeding 60 Hz to each eye. Since I hear talk about upcoming 3D monitors using 240 Hz, maybe that will solve the problem for me.

I have a 3 1/2 year old Sony front projector. I was thinking there would be sufficient improvements by the new generation coming in the fall (better blacks, higher refresh rates, etc.) that I might think about upgrading. Now with 3D on the horizon, maybe I'll hold off a little while to see what happens on the 3D front projector front.

I wandered passed the Sony Style store in Dallas today and saw the 3D sign in their front window so I went in. The flicker on the display was horrendously bad. If 3D is going to be like this, you couldn't pay me enough to have it in my house.

After none of the early posts in this thread mentioned it, I thought the problem was just with me. I know in the old days of CRT computer monitors, 60 Hz refresh rates would drive me crazy yet few of the people I worked with could even see the problem. For me, the problem would go away with a refresh rate above 72 Hz. There were no signs on the display saying what the refresh rate was. Hopefully, it was 120 Hz feeding 60 Hz to each eye. Since I hear talk about upcoming 3D monitors using 240 Hz, maybe that will solve the problem for me.

I have a 3 1/2 year old Sony front projector. I was thinking there would be sufficient improvements by the new generation coming in the fall (better blacks, higher refresh rates, etc.) that I might think about upgrading. Now with 3D on the horizon, maybe I'll hold off a little while to see what happens on the 3D front projector front.

Duane

It has been suggested that low battery level in the glasses will cause flicker in the images. Maybe a return visit will work with a set of glasses that are fully charged if this is indeed the problem.